Oh-it's wonderful! Look- Mummy- isn't it a beauty? Oh - darling - [She kisses Gerald hastily]'
Pg 5: 'I think it's perfect. Now I really feel engaged.
Sheila needs the expensive symbol of the wedding ring to validate her engagement. This suggests that she is superficial, materialistic, concerned with appearance. In this case, the ring is not a confirmation that the engagement is one of love but the material nature of the ring confirms that it's a business deal. Previously, only has verbal promise of engagement to Gerald, however this means little to her, she requires material proof to physically identify their love, showing that she upholds the same selfish and materialistic views and capitalist attributes of her father.
'Oh-it's wonderful! Look- Mummy- isn't it a beauty? Oh - darling - : Language is fragmented and broken up, perhaps showing the gesture was unexpected as 'all last summer' Gerald never 'came near' Sheila. Fragments show level of excitement and inability to express her gratitude.
The language is childish, showing that she is easily bought.
Structure is significant, she turns to her mother first to show her the ring, signifying the greater female empathy and ability of comprehending the significance of the exterior features of the ring, then turns back to Gerald, he is an afterthought.
Priestley revealing the ring itself serves as situational irony. A circle has no beginning or end and is therefore a symbol of infinity. It is endless, eternal, just the way love should be. It is a symbol of devotion and an agreement between two parties to love and cherish one another for the rest of their days; they will be committed to one another. Unbeknownst to the audience, this vow has already been broken due to Gerald's infidelity.
By using childlike colloqualisms such as 'mummy' to address her mother makes the audience automatically view her as immature, not as a grown-up who is about to be married. Her focus on the superficial aspect of her engagement ring, the appearance rather than the meaning and her inability to digest how this links with the harsh reality of the fate of Priestley's symbol of the working class, Eva Smith, solidify our view of her being naive and apparently conditioned by her family to follow this bourgeois regime. In the Edwardian society, and arguably in the modern society, a rich woman simply couldn't marry just because she was in love, she needed to ensure that she was financially secure.